DOCSLIB.ORG

Knowledge Unlatched: Toward an Open and Networked Future for Academic Publishing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Knowledge Unlatched: Toward an Open and Networked Future for Academic Publishing Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Charleston Library Conference Knowledge Unlatched: Toward an Open and Networked Future for Academic Publishing Frances Pinter Knowledge Unlatched, [email protected] Lucy Montgomery Knowledge Unlatched Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/charleston Part of the Library and Information Science Commons An indexed, print copy of the Proceedings is also available for purchase at: http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/series/charleston. You may also be interested in the new series, Charleston Insights in Library, Archival, and Information Sciences. Find out more at: http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/series/charleston-insights-library-archival- and-information-sciences. Frances Pinter and Lucy Montgomery, "Knowledge Unlatched: Toward an Open and Networked Future for Academic Publishing" (2012). Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284315130 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. Knowledge Unlatched: Toward an Open and Networked Future for Academic Publishing Frances Pinter, Executive Director, Knowledge Unlatched, London Lucy Montgomery, Research Director, Knowledge Unlatched, London Abstract Specialist book length publications in the humanities and social sciences (including but not exclusively monographs) are experiencing a crisis. It is clear that the current publishing system is failing both the producers and users of scholarship and neglects many of the opportunities associated with networked culture. This paper introduces Knowledge Unlatched (www.knowledgeunlatched.org), which aims to improve the efficiency of markets for scholarly books. Remember Books? Knowledge Unlatched? The focus of the Finch Review and the U.K. government’s response to it is how the existing This paper argues that monograph publishing is in system for publishing journal articles is failing crisis, because publishers have been attempting to scientific communities. Much less attention has replicate print business models in a digital world. been paid to shortcomings of current publishing We suggest that this approach is misguided and approaches for the humanities and social sciences, that more open approaches to content licensing or the growing discrepancies between possibilities and distribution will be key to reinvigorating of access and the realities of dissemination for monograph publishing and stimulating the growth scholarly books. of new markets for scholarly books. Real opportunities exist for publishers in a digital world Scholarly books have been at the heart of the and Open Access licensing will be an important production and dissemination of knowledge in the part of sustainable publishing in the 21st century. humanities and social sciences since the very Libraries have an important role to play in helping earliest days of universities. The deep connections monograph publishing to make a successful between books and scholarship are reflected in the transition towards effective digital business ways in which scholars are trained to carry out and models that facilitate the widest possible access present their work as well as in systems of to scholarly books. academic promotion and the funding and ranking of humanities-based research and the institutions Open Access Books: What Is Already that produce it. Happening? The crisis in book publishing, then, represents a A great deal is already happening in the world of crisis of the gravest proportions for scholarship in open access books. This section briefly examines the humanities and social sciences. It raises this landscape, and explains why a different fundamental questions about the nature of approach is needed. In 2012, the Director of Open scholarly enquiry and communication in the 21st Access Books lists 27 publishers as experimenting century and highlights a worrying lack of with open access book publishing, including some connection between one of the most highly prized of the best known academic presses (Directory of forms of scholarship and contemporary Open Access Books, 2012). Although there are readerships. almost as many models as there are initiatives, 386 Charleston Conference Proceedings 2012 Copyright of this contribution remains in the name of the author(s). http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284315130 only a minority of initiatives are financially self- Academic sells print and e-books through the usual sustaining; a majority operate with a combination channels.3 In some instances the books are of revenue and subsidy from an educational available in both hardback and paperback, or when institution or charitable fund. there is a surprisingly high interest in a book originally published in hardback, a paperback may One of the first experiments in open access be released after a year or two. scholarly books, set up in the 1990s, was the National Academies Press,1 which published free of Bloomsbury’s approach, in effect, mirrors the charge online in PDF and aimed to sell enough print traditional print business model, though at the copies to cover production costs. The results of this same time using the more extensive experiment have been inconclusive. Other discoverability of the free content as a marketing experiments suggest that making books open tool to promote print and e-book sales. So far access may help to increase sales by making them Bloomsbury Academic is selling at least as many, more discoverable. When the HSRC Press in Cape and in many cases more, copies than it would Town put their books on open content licenses in have expected using the conventional closed the mid-2000s, they saw a 240% increase in their model. Authors benefit from expanded print sales (Gray, Rens&, Bruns, 2010). Making readerships and information about usage patterns their content free increased awareness of the titles informs the editors at Bloomsbury Academic of the press was publishing and generated demand emerging trends in their fields. for print copies, especially throughout Africa where cross border trade in books has been particularly Although the Bloomsbury Academic model hard, not least because of lack of knowledge about improves access to scholarly books published on what is being publishing in neighbouring countries open access licences, it does not address the much ibid. deeper structural problems that have plagued monograph publishing over the last several If the traditional supply chain in the academic decades. The only kinds of publishers that are able publishing business has been author, publisher, to make money from monograph publishing in the library, reader then what is striking about the Open current market are very large publishers that have Access book initiatives already in operation is that streamlined operations and charge high prices and they originate from almost all of the parts of the heavily subsidised publishers that can take on a few chain and straddle or bypass elements of the chain titles each year knowing that subsidies will make up in diverse ways. The Gutenberg-e Project sources for losses (as many small university presses do and aggregates content through its competition now). process, paid for by learned societies and foundations while arranging for publication Libraries remain the main purchasers of through Columbia University Press, having Bloomsbury Academic monographs, and the costs negotiated making the content available online for of publishing a title still need to be amortised free.2 This is an excellent way of promoting the across the expected units of sale. Even if all work of young scholars, but is unlikely to be academic publishers adopted the Bloomsbury scalable. Academic model, the same library budgets would be buying the same number of books (whether One of the larger publisher driven experiments is at print or digital). Publishers would still need to rely Bloomsbury Academic. Monographs in certain sub- on sales of a small number of units at high prices sections of the humanities and social sciences have as they do now. The risks of publishing academic been published online on a creative commons non- monographs would remain the incentives for commercial license. The text appears in HTML on publishers to take on fewer titles or to focus their the publisher’s site. At the same time, Bloomsbury 1 See: http://www.nap.edu/ 3 See: http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/ 2 See: http://www.gutenberg-e.org/ page/28/faqs;jsessionid=67AD40125F3ADBBA7599C aboutframe.html A663E50064A Scholarly Communication 387 efforts on more lucrative portions of the market This is how the model works (see appendix for would remain compelling for publishers. notes): In Search of a New Model: The Role of 1. Publishers¹ offer titles² for sale reflecting Libraries origination costs only via Knowledge Unlatched.³ When thinking about a more efficient approach to 2. Individual libraries select titles either as paying for the publication of monographs, it is individual titles or as collections (as they do useful to return to the question of who currently from library suppliers now). funds this activity. Most of the money that now pays for monographs comes from library budgets. 3. Their selections are sent to Knowledge The role of libraries as the only purchasers of Unlatched specifying the titles to be monographs is closely linked to the difficulties purchased at the stated price(s). that this part of the publishing industry has faced 4. The price, called a Title
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pledging 2019 KU OPEN ACCESS HEROES 2019
    VERSION September 2019 Knowledge Unlatched Making Open Access Work Pledging 2019 KU OPEN ACCESS HEROES 2019 TOP Titles by Usage TOP Subject Areas Tweets and the Streets: Social Media and Contemporary Activism The Learning Econo- by my and the Econom- Paolo Gerbaudo ics of Hope Frankenstein : A New by Edition for Scientists Bengt-Åke Lundvall and Engineers by Jason Scott Robert History Political Sociology Literature Linguistics & Science Languages Philosophy Anthro- Media & Theology & Arts pology Communi- Religion cations # of Supporting Institutions per Region 9 27 Scandinavia 114 UK / Ireland North America 68 10 Germany / Austria / Switzerland BeNeLux 16 Australia / New Zealand www.knowledgeunlatched.org TOP KU Authors (by Region) 40.27% 17.17% 15.19% 4.89% 4.16% 3.33% North America UK / Ireland DACH Australia / NZ BeNeLux Scandinavia TOP 10 Publishers (# of Titles) TOP Institutions (# of Downloads) Pluto Press Liverpool University Press 32 31 1. Freie Universität Berlin 6. University of Oxford Manchester 33 204 Transcript 2. Kings College London 7. University of London University of 36 (SOAS) Michigan Press 3. University of Toronto 8. University of Sydney 56 Duke Peter Lang 38 4. Cambridge University 9. University of Edinburgh Mohr Siebeck Academic Studies 41 52 Press 5. Columbia University 10. University of California, 51 San Diego DeGruyter Sources: OAPEN, JSTOR, Altmetrics, based on 2018 Data © Knowledge Unlatched 2019 Knowledge Unlatched Overview KU Marketplace - Pledging Deadline November 30th Page Page New 1 KU Select 2019 Books
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full White Paper
    Open Access White Paper University of Oregon SENATE SUB-COMMITTEE ON OPEN ACCESS I. Executive Summary II. Introduction a. Definition and History of the Open Access Movement b. History of Open Access at the University of Oregon c. The Senate Subcommittee on Open Access at the University of Oregon III. Overview of Current Open Access Trends and Practices a. Open Access Formats b. Advantages and Challenges of the Open Access Approach IV. OA in the Process of Research & Dissemination of Scholarly Works at UO a. A Summary of Current Circumstances b. Moving Towards Transformative Agreements c. Open Access Publishing at UO V. Advancing Open Access at the University of Oregon and Beyond a. Barriers to Moving Forward with OA b. Suggestions for Local Action at UO 1 Executive Summary The state of global scholarly communications has evolved rapidly over the last two decades, as libraries, funders and some publishers have sought to hasten the spread of more open practices for the dissemination of results in scholarly research worldwide. These practices have become collectively known as Open Access (OA), defined as "the free, immediate, online availability of research articles combined with the rights to use these articles fully in the digital environment." The aim of this report — the Open Access White Paper by the Senate Subcommittee on Open Access at the University of Oregon — is to review the factors that have precipitated these recent changes and to explain their relevance for members of the University of Oregon community. Open Access History and Trends Recently, the OA movement has gained momentum as academic institutions around the globe have begun negotiating and signing creative, new agreements with for-profit commercial publishers, and as innovations to the business models for disseminating scholarly research have become more widely adopted.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access in Its Next Phase: from Single Products to Marketplaces
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.18243/eon/2018.11.11.1 Open Access in Its Next Phase: From Single Products to Marketplaces humanities), librarians and publishers have long been chal- By Sven Fund lenged to address issues such as copyright, intellectual Managing Director property, quality, and pricing—for right or wrong. Knowledge Unlatched and fullstopp Consequently, and in order to broaden its reach as a vi- able model, OA needs to strive for more consolidation at some point—and it needs to better communicate its ben- efits to the key stakeholders, these being researchers and authors. Open access (OA) is probably the most significant innovation Marketplaces of the past decades when it comes to business models in scholarly publishing. In less than two decades, it has rapidly The OA development in journal publishing can be characterized moved from the idealistic periphery to a center stage position, in two phases. During first 10 years, startups of pure OA pub- and there is virtually no significant publisher left that does not lishers like the Public Library of Science (PLoS) or Hindawi offer OA as a key element of their publication strategy.The rise flourished alongside hybrid models, which combined sub- of the model has been accompanied by many experiments, scriptions and APCs; Springer’s acquisition of BioMedCentral first for journals, but more lately also for books and data. As a (BMC)in2008markedanimportantstepintheconsolidation consequence, OA today comes in many flavors, from more and maturing of the space. The field has seen a consolidation as simplistic models around article processing charges (APC), yet unprecedented in academic publishing, whereby the top through memberships, to crowd funding by libraries from all three players today control 50% of the market.
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Unlatched Proof-Of-Concept Pilot
    A Global Library Consortium Model for Funding Open Access Scholarly Books Full Report on the Proof of Concept Pilot 2014 Lucy Montgomery Curtin University, Australia Abstract This special issue of Cultural Science Journal is devoted to the report of a groundbreaking experiment in re-coordinating global markets for specialist scholarly books and enabling the knowledge commons: the Knowledge Unlatched proof-of-concept pilot. The pilot took place between January 2012 and September 2014. It involved libraries, publishers, authors, readers and research funders in the process of developing and testing a global library consortium model for supporting Open Access books. The experiment established that authors, librarians, publishers and research funding agencies can work together in powerful new ways to enable open access; that doing so is cost effective; and that a global library consortium model has the potential dramatically to widen access to the knowledge and ideas contained in book-length scholarly works. Journal of Cultural Science Vol.7, No 2 (2014): Knowledge Unlatched http://cultural-science.org/journal Knowledge Unlatched: A Global Library Consortium Model for Funding Open Access Scholarly Books Full Report on the Proof of Concept Pilot 2014 Cultural Science Journal ~ http://cultural-science.org/journal ~ ISSN 1836-0416 ~ Vol 7, No. 2, 2014 ~ 1 This report provides information about the Knowledge Unlatched proof-of-concept Pilot, which took place between January 2012 and September 2014. The Pilot involved libraries, publishers, authors, readers and research funders in the process of developing and testing a global library consortium model for supporting Open Access books. 297 libraries from 24 countries shared the cost of ‘unlatching’ 28 newly published Humanities and Social Sciences research titles, provided by 13 well-known scholarly publishers.
    [Show full text]
  • Glossary of Scholarly Communications Terms
    Your Institution’s Logo Here INSTITUTIONAL MOBILIZATION TOOLKIT Glossary of Scholarly Communications Terms Altmetrics What Can I Do? Altmetrics – also known as cybermetrics or webometrics – are non- Be aware that the increasing traditional metrics that are proposed as an alternative to traditional citation cost of journals is outpacing impact metrics. Altmetrics.org, the organization leading the Altmetrics the increase of library movement, proposes to create new metrics that includes social web activity, budgets, putting pressure on such as: your library to do more with Usage, based on the number of downloads less. Peer-review – when a scholar is considered to have be an expert Citations – using traditional methodologies Be open to a conversation with your librarian about Alt-metrics – analyzing links, bookmarks and conversations your scholarly content needs APC in terms of your research and Article Processing Charge. A fee paid by authors to subsidize the processing teaching, in an environment and publishing costs for open access journals. where tough content retention decisions may have Berlin Declaration on Open Access to be made. The publication of the “Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities” on 22 October 2003 and the subsequent What Are annual conferences heralded the introduction of a process that heightened Libraries Doing? awareness around the theme of accessibility to scientific information. 2013 Working through consortia to marked the tenth anniversary of the publication of the Berlin Declaration. leverage greater purchasing Berlin 12 was held in December 2015 with a focus on the transformation of power. subscription journals to Open Access. Tools: Big Deal Introduction First initiated by Academic Press in 1996, the Big Deal is a structure in which Evolution of Journal a commercial scholarly publisher sells their content as a large bundle, as Pricing opposed to individual journals.
    [Show full text]
  • Walking the Plank: How Scholarly Piracy Affects Publishers, Libraries and Their Users
    Walking the Plank: How Scholarly Piracy Affects Publishers, Libraries and Their Users Laurie Morrison, Carol Stephenson, and Elizabeth Yates* Introduction The arrival of technology supporting peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing in scholarly communication has, until -re cently, had minimal impact on libraries. However, threats posed by pirate sites including Library Genesis Project (LibGen) and Sci-Hub are now impacting both library users and library licensing agreements with publishers. Publishers are nervous as they witness their proprietary content leaking out of paywalled systems—not just hundreds of thousands of articles, but millions. Accordingly, publishers are monitoring activities in licensed products very closely for any behavior that they deem suspicious. When a user’s activities cause a publisher to question whether materials are being pirated, the outcomes can vary. Consequences can range from relatively minor inconvenience for blocked users, who must find workarounds to access scholarly content—to the poten- tial for major disruption of a centuries-old proprietary publishing system. This article uses a case study involving a student at Brock University to highlight significant challenges facing libraries and the rights of their users in the current environment of piracy-wary academic publishers. Case Study: Access Denied “I feel like I’m being penalized for my honesty.” That’s how a graduate student at Brock University felt in January 2016, after her legitimate quest to download several hundred articles for a meta-analysis project turned into a protracted—and ultimately unsuccessful—negotiation with the American Psychological Association. Sarah† had downloaded about 20 articles from the PsycINFO database when she received the following screen prompt: The APA PsycNET Terms and Conditions prohibit “Systematic downloading of content, whether done manually or by technological means.” Please contact [email protected] if you are inter- ested in data mining or wish to conduct a systematic review or meta analysis with PsycINFO data.
    [Show full text]
  • How We Pay for Publishing, Page 1
    This is a preprint of an article to be published in Against the Grain, Vol. 26, No. 6. © 2014 by Kevin S. Hawkins and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. How We Pay for Publishing, Page 1 How We Pay for Publishing Kevin S. Hawkins University of North Texas Libraries How did we get into this mess? Higher education administrators, funding bodies, and librarians are unhappy with the cost to acquire and access scholarly literature, especially subscription-based journals from commercial publishers, whose price increases far outstrip the growth in library budgets. An outsider might ask how it can cost so much to get access to many leading scholarly publications in an age when it costs so little to produce copies of documents. After all, the retail prices of print books have been largely flat, despite inflation, and Amazon and Apple have driven down the prices for digital books and music. Readers and authors are increasingly feeling the system’s dysfunction as well, finding that they are unable to get access through their institution to the publications that they need for their work and that acquiring their own copy is ridiculously expensive. While the problem has been created by commercial publishers skimming the cream of academic publications and then charging handsomely for access to these prestige brands, it has been difficult to effect change in the system because scholars are the consumers of the content but only rarely the purchasers of it; as with health care and prescription drugs, the true costs of market consolidation and intellectual property protection are not borne by the consumers of the services and products.
    [Show full text]
  • Converting Scholarly Journals to Open Access: a Review of Approaches and Experiences David J
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln 2016 Converting Scholarly Journals to Open Access: A Review of Approaches and Experiences David J. Solomon Michigan State University Mikael Laakso Hanken School of Economics Bo-Christer Björk Hanken School of Economics Peter Suber editor Harvard University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons, Scholarly Communication Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Solomon, David J.; Laakso, Mikael; Björk, Bo-Christer; and Suber, Peter editor, "Converting Scholarly Journals to Open Access: A Review of Approaches and Experiences" (2016). Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc.. 27. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/27 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Converting Scholarly Journals to Open Access: A Review of Approaches and Experiences By David J. Solomon, Mikael Laakso, and Bo-Christer Björk With interpolated comments from the public and a panel of experts Edited by Peter Suber Published by the Harvard Library August 2016 This entire report, including the main text by David Solomon, Bo-Christer Björk, and Mikael Laakso, the preface by Peter Suber, and the comments by multiple authors is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 1 Preface Subscription journals have been converting or “flipping” to open access (OA) for about as long as OA has been an option.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Open Access and the Role of the Library
    The Future of Open Access And the role of the Library www.ubiquitypress.com / @ubiquitypress Talk Overview 1. The Open Access Movement • Background • Open Access today • Drivers of OA 2. Open Access Business Models • Established publishers and disruptive forces 3. The Library and Open Access (from a Publisher’s perspective!) 4. Open Access into the future www.ubiquitypress.com / @ubiquitypress About Ubiquity Press Mission To return control of publishing to universities and researchers by providing access to sustainable, high quality Open Access services To disrupt scholarly publishing with a publication model that outperforms that of legacy publishers www.ubiquitypress.com / @ubiquitypress About Ubiquity Press Background . Spun out of University College London in 2012 . Researcher-led . Publish 22 fully-OA journals . Comprehensive approach: journals, books, data, software, wetware… . Work with institutions to launch journals, monographs series, university presses. www.ubiquitypress.com / @ubiquitypress Open Access By “open access” to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the New Wave of the Open Access Movement
    Understanding the new wave of the open access movement Sunshine Carter Jodi Carlson Grebinoski Allison Langham-Putrow Presented on October 4, 2019 at Electronic Resources Minnesota (ERMN) Silvia template from SlidesCarnival in St. Paul, MN Agenda for today ◦ Overview of open access ◦ Waves of open access ◦ Plan S ◦ Transformative Models Overview of Open Access What is Open Access? “Open-access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions. What makes it possible is the internet and the consent of the author or copyright-holder.” —Very Brief Introduction to Open Access by Peter Suber Types of Open ◦ Journals ◦ Books ◦ OER (Open Education Resources) ◦ Open Science/Open Research ◦ …and more Open Journals ◦ Fully OA journals ◦ All articles are OA ◦ Find them in Directory of Open Access Journals (13,771 journals; 130 countries; 4.3 million articles) ◦ “Hybrid” OA journals ◦ Subscription journals with an option for authors to pay an article processing charge (APC) to make their individual article open. ◦ Most subscription journals from large publishers have a hybrid option Understanding the “Colors” of OA ◦ Green ◦ Materials made openly available somewhere other than the original place of publication ◦ Gold ◦ “Born open” ◦ May or may not require author to pay ◦ Fully Gold OA v. Hybrid OA ◦ Diamond/Platinum ◦ “Born open” ◦ Does not require authors to pay ◦ Bronze ◦ Free to read from publisher site, but not really OA because of lack of re-use rights Where does the money come from? ◦
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Unlatched
    Knowledge Unlatched INFORMATION FÜR DIE PRESSE Terry Ehling und Alison Mudditt verstärken den Beirat von Knowledge Unlatched. Berlin, 20. Juli 2018. Knowledge Unlatched (KU) begrüßt die neuesten Mitglieder in seinem Beirat. Terry Ehling, Director for Strategic Initiatives der MIT Press, ist zusammen mit Alison Mudditt, Chief Executive Officer bei PLOS, in den Beirat eingetreten. "Ihre Expertise in Open Scholarship insgesamt und ihr Interesse an der Erforschung von Modellen, die über das APC-Modell hinausgehen, stimmen perfekt mit der Geschäftsstrategie von Knowledge Unlatched überein", sagt Dr. Sven Fund, Managing Director bei Knowledge Unlatched über die Ernennung dieser beiden Vordenker. Terry Ehling ist verantwortlich für die Operationalisierung wichtiger Entwicklungen innerhalb des strategischen Plans von MIT Press und trägt dazu bei, eine solide Basis für kontinuierliches Wachstum und Innovation zu schaffen. Sie freut sich, an der Gestaltung der KU Open Access Initiativen mitzuwirken, insbesondere im Hinblick auf anstehende Projekte, die dem Open-Access-Verlagssektor weitere Transparenz und Einblicke verschaffen sollen. "Der Wunsch, nicht nur die Anzahl der zugänglichen wissenschaftlichen Inhalte zu erhöhen, sondern auch eine verlässliche und umgesetzte Erfahrung in diesem Verlagsbereich anzustreben, ist eine der Hauptmotivationen für mich, dem Beirat von Knowledge Unlatched beizutreten", sagt Terry Ehling. Für Alison Mudditt ist die Teilnahme an Knowledge Unlatched ein Blick in die Zukunft. "Die digitale Verbreitung und Analyse frei zugänglicher wissenschaftlicher Inhalte bietet der gesamten wissenschaftlichen Gemeinschaft die Chance, schneller und effizienter zu arbeiten", erklärt sie. "Ich freue mich, der Initiative "Knowledge Unlatched" beizutreten, in einer Zeit, in der sie jedes Jahr weiter wächst, Projekte und Partnerinitiativen ausweitet und die vielen Möglichkeiten, die Open Scholarship bietet, nutzt.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining Plan S & Transformative Agreements
    Chapman University Chapman University Digital Commons Library Presentations, Posters, and Videos Leatherby Libraries 2-18-2020 SCELC Open Access Webinar: Defining Plan S & rT ansformative Agreements Kristin Laughtin-Dunker Chapman University, [email protected] DeDe Leshy Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/library_presentations Part of the Collection Development and Management Commons, Scholarly Communication Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Recommended Citation Laughtin-Dunker, K., & Leshy, D. (2020, February 18). SCELC open access webinar: Defining Plan S & transformative agreements [Webinar]. https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/library_presentations/28 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Leatherby Libraries at Chapman University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Library Presentations, Posters, and Videos by an authorized administrator of Chapman University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SCELC Open Access Webinar: Defining Plan S & rT ansformative Agreements Comments The Download button will provide a PDF of the presentation slides, while a stream of the webinar (with full audio) may be viewed below. Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. This article is available at Chapman University Digital Commons: https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/ library_presentations/28 SCELC Open Access Webinar:
    [Show full text]